hello, this is bbc news. the headlines. as plans to ease lockdown in england start to be revealed — residents in care homes will be allowed indoor visits by a member of their family or a friend — from next month. a court in russia has upheld an earlier decision to jail the opposition activist, alexei navalny, for nearly three years.

president biden is set to declare a major disaster in texas — as he unlocks federal funds for a state paralysed by a severe freeze and a huge powerfailure. the duke of edinburgh is expected to stay in hospital over the weekend and into next week for observation and rest. and reality star, kim kardashian files for divorce from her husband — kanye west — after seven years of marriage. now on bbc news hardtalk with stephen sackur. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. thousands of indian farmers are keeping up their long—running protest against the modi government's farm law reform. their protest camps on the outskirts of delhi have become a symbol of defiance. but india's populist prime minister has faced down a host of opponents in the past. will this time be

any different? my guest is yogendra yadav, leader of the swaraj party and a prominent backer of the farmers�* cause. is modi versus the farmers a defining moment for india? yogendra yadav, in rewari near delhi, welcome to hardtalk. thank you. you are on the coordinating committee of the main group behind the farmers�* protest.

we have been watching them for the last weeks and months, but it does seem as though right now they may be losing momentum. is that right? not quite. in an extraordinary movement of this kind, given the size, scale, time, you have ups and downs. but remember, we are looking at near—about 100,000 people, farmers camping outside the national capital territory. remember, it's nearly three months now, so people come and go. and, yes, the mainstream media would like to imagine that we don't exist any more. but all you have to do is to send your correspondents — farmers are there with a resolve which is unmatched, in numbers, which the country has not seen, in situations which are impossible. we've been through the indian winter, which i admit is nothing compared to the british winter, but if you have to stay out like we did, then it has demonstrated a very unusual resolve, which

continues to be there. the government has said that it's suspending the implementation of the three farm laws that you are so upset about, while a committee looks at the detail and perhaps considers adaptation and change. why are you not prepared to give that committee a chance, tell all of the farmers to go home, and defuse the tension? the government has not stayed it as yet. the supreme court has — strangely, without assigning any reason, without assigning even a term limit to say, all right, let's...for this much period and so on. the government has merely offered, we might stay it for a year and a half, provided there are committees and so on and so forth. but the trouble is, i don't quite understand the logic of one and a half years — this regime is here for three years. we don't know what would happen

in a year and a half. one thing that would happen for sure is that farmers will move away. so that doesn't work with the farmers. the reason they are unwilling — we farm associations are unwilling to work with minor tinkering and amendments, which is what the government wants — is because we think the basic intent of these three laws is anti—farmer. you can tweak a law provided the overall intent is right, provided there are problems in the way it's worded. you can tweak a law, you can amend it, provided you have a problem with one side provision, one additional provision. but if the main intent of the law itself is something you object to, how can you agree to an amendment? what is anti—farmer about the desire to make farming more prosperous? you know better than i that prime minister modi, back in 2016, promised to double farmers�* incomes over the following six years. well, he hasn't achieved that

yet, but he says this reform is absolutely crucial to delivering on his promise to make farmers substantially better off. i'm glad you remember that promise of the doubling of farmers�* income. and, as you know, in reality, the growth has been less than 2%. it was promised that it would be doubled in six years. the fact is, the government is yet to offer, even formal statistics about how much increase has taken place... but, if i may, mryadav, part of the point is that modi and his team say that there's no way to deliver greater, significant greater prosperity to the farming industry without introducing the market much more thoroughly and completely to agricultural economics. that's precisely why they want to get away from this state—run purchasing system and allow private sector companies to move in to the purchase of agricultural produce. that's how they would

want to present it and the world to believe. the simple fact is that indian agricultural marketing continues to be largely private. the state purchasing a quantum of that is actually less than 10%, as per the government's own claims. what the farmers need is better marketing infrastructure. they had been demanding it. the government doesn't respond to it. what the farmers need is better protection against risk mitigation. the government has to do something about it. they don't respond to it. yeah, they do. they do. the government has said that it guarantees that the price support to ensure a minimum price guarantee for farmers will be maintained in this new system that they want to introduce. that's one of the beautiful—designed lies

the government peddles all the time. what the government does is that it officially announces a minimum support price. now, you and i would imagine once the government says, here is a minimum support price the farmers should get, the government would do something about letting them have it. the truth is, and this is an officially admitted truth, that having announced it, the government goes to sleep. 23 crops are given this msp — minimum support price — which is a kind of formal assurance of lower price. but in reality, not more than two or three are actually procured, purchased. government of india officially admits that only 6% of farmers benefit from this provision. 94% don't. what kind of a guarantee is that? and actually, steve, that's exactly what we are asking for. we are simply saying, don't give us the gift that you want to give us — give us the gift that we want.

namely, you declare a minimum support price — just give it to us, that's all we are... hang on. you seem to be in the bizarre position of protecting and defending the status quo. and the status quo for the last generation or so has been really bad for many, many farmers. and we know that, not least because more than 10,000 a year commit suicide, living in absolute poverty and rural misery. why are you intent on defending a system which clearly doesn't work? that's not fair on the farmers�* union, steve, because we, the farmers�* associations, actually have been demanding reform year after yea r. we actually proposed two laws. so we don'tjust oppose. in 2018—19, we placed before the indian parliament two pieces of law demanding exactly the kind of reforms that we need. of course indian agriculture needs reform. it needs structural reforms

because indian farmers need an economic crisis, ecological crisis, which is turning into an existential crisis. so, yes, we need something to be done. but this is not the something we wanted. this is not the something that is going to benefit the farmers. this is something which not a single farmer union ever asked for... but isn't this really about where india is going, about the very soul of india today? because narendra modi's whole proposition is, the country needs fundamental economic reform. and to quote the bjp general secretary, whom we've had on this show ram madhav, he said recently, fear of the market is inherent in the psyche of many societies that were exposed to socialistic protectionist practices for far too long. that's a mind—set that modi and his team are determined to get rid of. and may i say, perhaps it's a mind—set that you and some others at the head of this farmers�* movement are still defending.

that could be an impression from outside and it would be a pity if the soul of india were to be reduced to markets. i really thought the ruling party, mr ram madhav and others, would find something better to anchor the soul of india. as for the socialistic. .. well, to be fair, that was my, that was my interpretation of how deep this argument is. he didn't use that phrase. but it does seem to me that, as i said at the very beginning, modi versus the farmers is an existentially important moment for india. and i'm just trying to get a sense of the vision you have for the india that you're currently fighting for. we have been saying quite clearly that we want minimum state support. if you call it socialistic, in that case, european union is socialistic, in that case us is socialistic. i do not know of any country in the world that does not offer support to its agriculture. at the moment, and ijust want to place it on record, an 0ecd study has shown that

indian state has offered negative subsidy — mind my words — we have offered negative subsidy to our farmers over the last two decades or so. so the idea that it is some socialistic state offering great things to the farmers, all this is myth. this is textbook economics, in reality. all right... we need more markets, we need protected markets, we need some minimum assured prices, and after that, we want free market to flow. well, let's get to tactics then, and where you go from where you are today, cos it seems to me something very important happened onjanuary 26th, which i believe in india is republic day. but more to the point, this year was a day which saw really serious clashes between police in delhi, right in the centre of delhi, the red fort governmental area of delhi, and a host of protesters, who did appear, according to the pictures i saw, to be intent

on violence. now, how damaging was that? because it was seen all over india by many, many millions of people. how damaging was it to your cause? this doesn't make for good pictures at all. but let's begin the day... this was the day when nearly 300,000 to 400,000 tractors marched into the capital, according to the programme we had announced. and we said this would be a celebration of indian republic. mind you, every single of those protesters was carrying indian nationalflag, which is what we had mandated. there was a standard route. the route was broken. the police says it was broken because we were indisciplined. every evidence so far points out to things other than that, that the police allowed them to go to different routes. and the most amazing thing no—one asks, because the symbols from lal qila have been flashed — this is the place where the prime

minister of india addresses the nation from on the 15th of august, so a very sacred place. the police says, you entered lal qila. the question that everyone wants to ask is, how is it that on the republic day, on a day when everyone expected, feared something to happen, hundreds, possibly thousands of people were allowed inside that particular sacred place? how is it that, in the presence of police — and you can see them sitting on the chairs, there's a long bbc footage of about an hour or so, police sitting, watching, allowing all this to happen? well, i'm sorry, but i'm a little confused about what point you're making, cos indian government officials have drawn parallels with what happened in the assault, the mob assault on the us capitol. they've said that what happened onjanuary 26th in delhi

was equally unacceptable. and i don't know if you're being misquoted, but i saw a quote from you on the press trust of india website — you saying, i feel ashamed of the way things proceeded and i take responsibility for it. so was that a misquote or... no. ..do you feel a sense of shame? this is completely unacceptable — for this to happen on the red fort, on the republic day, is unacceptable. so you do feel a sense of shame? i'm sorry, ijust want to get very clear here because, again, indians across the country are going to be listening to your words. that was shameful, was it? so how do you ensure that it never, ever happens again? what do you do with the extremists in your midst? i'm saying quite clearly what happened was shameful. every indian would feel ashamed of what happened, and we farmers unions have said we did not approve of it, we did not allow this, but we are willing to take moral responsibility because what happened was wrong.

we are also saying, would the police please look into how it happened? would we actually have a public documentation of who was allowed, why were they allowed the way they went, why is it that someone was allowed to use a public address system, someone with known separatist proclivities was allowed to be there and get out quietly? there are lots and lots of questions that need to be answered. well, some of the questions are... yes, i understand, mryadav. some of the questions are being laid at your door. i understand there's a police investigation and that you have been named as one of those that the police want to investigate. what is happening with that? well, the police has come up with a very general charge sheet saying all the leaders need to be investigated. we're saying, fine, let's investigate, let's find out. let's get to specifics. and this is not for the first time, steve. this is a standard pattern in india for the last couple of years.

you have a protest. the police uses first the media to defame the protesters, then they send goons protected by the police — this is what happened twice already — and then there are all kinds of cases charge—sheeted. so criminalising of dissent is not something new. this is the path being used once again. you call it the criminalisation of dissent. again, you are very well aware that the government and some of its media backers have quite specifically said that the farmers�* movement has been taken over by those seeking to achieve their objective of a khalistan — that is a sikh separatist movement — and also those who, from outside the country, are seeking to pursue an islamist agenda. as best you know, is either that khalistan political objective or the islamist agenda, part of what motivavates some people currently sitting in your protest camps?

nothing can be more ridiculous than that. those who are sitting in these camps are people whose sons and in some cases daughters are serving the country on the borders. remember, the farmers are mostly from the state of punjab and haryana and areas close by. these are areas that contribute maximum numbers to the indian army. and we have witnessed, in the course of all this, that soldiers who died, their parents are here. so to call them... and this is not something that began on the 26th of january. right from the beginning, the government has been intent on finding ways of tarring the movement. it began by saying, these are not farmers, these are paid agents. then they said, these are agents of political parties. then they said khalistanis. then they said everything. but farmers�* movement has

taken a very clear stand. and, since you are interested in what i had to say, on the 14th of january, there was a declaration by someone to say, go and fly khalistani flag on the india gate on 26th — we'll reward you. and i went public and said, these are enemies of the movement. we openly, publicly condemned them. farmers�* movement have given a call for social boycott of someone who raised a flag other than the indian tricolour in red fort. i referred to this as maybe an existential moment for india. right now, it still looks as though prime minister modi commands the support of a clear majority of the indian people, including people who have watched the standoff with the farmers�* movement. if you look at opinion polling, his approval ratings are still high. it still looks as though the bjp is in a very strong position to do well in regional elections in april.

how can you explain the popularity, continuing, of narendra modi? in my previous birth, i was a technical pollster, so i would resist the temptation of getting into polling and suchlike. but i would simply say, look, the larger question of his popularity is besides the point in this particular instance. we're speaking of one particular segment, the largest segment, namely the farmers of india, who are saying, mr modi, you've given us a gift that we never wanted — why don't you give us what we want? and mr modi seems to be saying, no, now that i have gifted it, you'd better accept it. and my own sense as a former pollster, as someone who used to have something to do with opinion polling, is that over the last two or three months, ever since this agitation has unfolded, farmers may not understand the technicalities of law, but the broad impression that's seeping down is that mr modi is up to something big, something bad

for the farmers, at the behest of some corporate houses. that cannot possibly contribute to his overall image — though damaging his image is not our overall objective. we just want this to be settled. we want to go back home. we want to be able to say, well, the government listened to us, that's what i'm focused on. my focus is not really on how to damage mr modi in the coming elections... no, but the problem is that, as you've just outlined it, you're saying the farmers have some real leverage and power in this country — but the truth is, farming is now responsible for only 15% of indian gdp. if one looks at the s&p�*s latest predictions for the indian economy next year, it's... even post—pandemic, it's predicted it may grow by up to 10%. modi is delivering for millions and millions of indian people. and i wonder whether you are overestimating the power

of the farming movement to change the dynamic. just to give you numbers... in democracy, while gdp numbers matter, the other number that matters is simple numbers. so farming employs about 48% of indian working population. in rural india, it employs about 57% of the population. that's a number i would imagine a politician would be concerned about. whether mr modi's delivering? now, that's a very big question. the question of 10% growth, it all depends on what the previous year was. indian agriculture has held up, not because of mr modi, not despite mr modi. that's a different thing altogether. but i really do not think you would get a professional economist who would say mr modi has delivered on the economy, but... well, 0k. so, a final thought, then, cos this isn't

just about economics. it's about the entire modi mission, which involves a commitment to hindu nationalism, i would say — many indians would say, more importantly. you are from a family where your own father was so keen on the secular principle in your country that he actually originally named you salim — even though you're from a hindu family, he wanted you to have a muslim name as a symbol of that unitarian approach. do you believe that mr modi is changing india in a way that would make any such gesture in the future almost unthinkable to most indian people? the country is profoundly — and, it seems, permanently — changing in the modi era. that's the larger challenge. the story you referred to is about my father, who actually watched his own father being butchered by a muslim mob, and then he turned around and said, no, i'm not going to hate muslims. i'm going to name my son... i'm going to give my son muslim name. now, that's not about me —

that's about my father. that's about. . .the spirit of india. that's about mahatma gandhi. that's. .. yes, it's a fascinating story, but it's a story of an india that no longer exists. that's what people like me worry about. when we look at the bigger picture, it's the idea of india that's being trampled upon. what we are witnessing is nothing short of a dismantling of the indian republic, brick by brick. and that, for me, is the biggest challenge the country faces. that's where i see people like me playing a role. and yet, if i may say so, just to finish — the truth is, narendra modi wins elections and your swaraj — very secular party — doesn't win any seats, regionally or nationally. that's my point. that's the india of today. swaraj india, my own party, may not be the best measure of the resistance that india

can offer, but i am absolutely clear india is not a nation of one race or one religion. india is an idea. the idea of diversity, of democracy, of development for the last person. that idea shall triumph. all right. people like me may perish. we may have to pay some cost. you cannot defend your republic and not pay any cost. but india, the idea of india, shall triumph. the idea of india is much bigger than its current rulers or possibly the current dissenters. yogendra yadav, we have to end there, but i do thank you very much indeed forjoining me on hardtalk.

rain has already caused flooding in some parts of southern wales were a met office amber warning is enforced. if the baby highest brand we could see up to 200 millimetres of rain falling by the end of today. this is the radar over the last 2a hours, it showers that the of rain has been a build endless, also following heavenly across the south—west of england, parts of north—west england and rain has been pushing back across northern ireland and scotland as well but through the west of the afternoon, the rain will actually start to ease off a little across parts of wales and the south—west. eastern parts of england

holding on to dry and relatively bright weather in the best of any sunshine we are looking at highs of 16 or 17 degrees. but it is mild across the board. windy for all as well. the strongest winds running up to these western coastal areas, gusts of 50—60 mph. may be stronger than that for a time. 0ver gusts of 50—60 mph. may be stronger than that for a time. over 90 strongest winds were transparent to be south—west of scotland. using a little elsewhere. much of the rain easing as well. a band of cloud, patchy ben and resident was the south—east and shove it towards the natwest. many spells ending with clear spells and temperatures holding between five and 11 degrees. together the mud on the south—east corner towards the south—east of this weather of rain which will still be hanging around through tomorrow bringing some cloud, some patchy rain and drizzle. a bit of uncertainty about the exact movement tomorrow. it will be moving aimlessly around but rain feed in into the south west, parts of wales to the day. for the north and west

bc sunshine and showers. temperatures ranging from 11 to 15 degrees. now, as we head on into monday that old weather front will still be sitting on bass. a better bit of a name that will ease to monday night into tuesday. another frontal system pushes and from the west which will bring heavy and persistent rain in parts of scotland and northern ireland. to the south—east of that frontal system we will be tapping and once again to some exceptionally mild air for the time of year. so we will see temperatures peaking in the south at about 17 degrees. some rain to the south—east for a time. it should be drierfor most of south—east for a time. it should be drier for most of us by the end of the week.

this is bbc news. i'm lewis vaughan jones. the headlines at 2pm... care home residents in england will be allowed to pick one person to visit them regularly from the 8th of march, as easing of lockdown measures start to be revealed. the hospitality industry says it will need at least two weeks�* notice before re—opening to ensure supply chains are in place. the russian opposition activist alexei navalny appears in court in moscow where his prison sentence is upheld. hsbc says it�*s reviewing its procedures for fraud victims after a bbc investigation reveals one victim was kept on hold for 20 hours before they were able to speak to someone. president biden is set to declare a major disaster in texas as he unlocks federal funds for a state paralysed by a severe freeze and a huge powerfailure.

and reality star kim kardashian files